At 09:16 PM 8/31/98 -0700, Joseph Mastropaolo wrote:
>
> Now the significant fact about these nodules is that they are not
>solidly filled and have a mud-flat texture on the inside. The first
>inescapable conclusion to be drawn from this structure is that they were
>at one time muddy on the inside and nearly dry at the surface. Then,
>when they did eventually lose their moisture, the mud-flat texture
>formed on the inside. There are no cracks at the surface. Petersen
>also shows photographs of several examples of this mud-flat texture.
> The second inescapable conclusion to be drawn is that those relatively
>massive objects did not waft into place on the breeze from some other
>location. They could only have dropped into place directly from above.
>Petersen then shows photographs of some of these nodules with snail
>shells embedded in their surface, the shells being largely filled with
>the same material as constitutes the nodule itself.
Post depositional diagenesis caused by water flow through the loess can
create nodules. As water flows through the loess, it dissolves and
redeposits the calcium. That is why the inside of the snail shells have
calcium in them. The water can get to the inside of the shells and then
leaves its calcium when it dries out. We see this phenomenon in limestones
all the time. So why you think it is 'inescapable', it isn't. Go look up
vadose sedementation in a good carbonate petrography book. That explains
why the carbonate is inside the shells.
> I consider it manifestly impossible to account for these nodules, the
>snails, and the silt itself by any mechanism agreeable to the known laws
>of physics and the Principle of Uniformity. If you are able to do so,
>then please speak up. However, if you are not able to do so, then you
>might well refrain from making snide remarks about Petersen's appeal to
>a fourth dimension of space.
I appreciate your opinion about how impossible it is to account for things
but it isn't. And one is free to dismiss the appeal to the 4th spatial
dimension if there is evidence against it from other sciences. I referred
you to a work that showed that the waves (sound waves, light waves etc) can
not carry information with fidelity in universes with spatial dimensions
higher than 3. And you failed to address that. Until you can solve this
problem the appeal to the 4th dimension is falsified by the communication
we are currently having via electromagnetic waves. And because of this, I
find Petersen's hypothesis ill-thought out and falsified by much of today's
science.
glenn
Adam, Apes and Anthropology
Foundation, Fall and Flood
& lots of creation/evolution information
http://www.isource.net/~grmorton/dmd.htm